Description: Chapter 5 simulates the risk adjustment process within a hypothetical purchasing alliances using four different risk assessment methods. From A Comparative Analysis of Methods of Health Risk Assessment, M-HB96-1.

Description: Three appendices: Selected Readings, Summary of Data Preparation and Data Issues, and Detailed Results on Predictive Accuracy. From A Comparative Analysis of Methods of Health Risk Assessment, M-HB96-1.

Description: Chapter 3 describes the methods and data being used in the evaluation predictive accuracy. From A Comparative Analysis of Methods of Health Risk Assessment, M-HB96-1.

Description: Chapter 7 reviews several items that the study identified as requirements for a good risk assessment method. They are: accurate predictability, practicality and reasonable cost, limitation on ability to game the system, timeliness in regard to premiums, appropriate incentives for efficiency. From A Comparative Analysis of Methods of Health Risk Assessment, M-HB96-1.

Description: This SOA-funded study examines the relative performance of different risk assessment methods and risk adjustment systems. From A Comparative Analysis of Methods of Health Risk Assessment, M-HB96-1.

Description: Introduction sets out the objectives of comparing the predictive accuracy of different risk assessment methods, comparing the different methods based on other criteria, and then examining issues related to high-cost individuals and conditions. From A Comparative Analysis of Methods of Health Risk Assessment, M-HB96-1.

Description: Chapter 8 suggests possible areas for further research such as other data groupings, high risk pooling, how diagnosis-based risk assessment might be improved, study of an expanded list of high-cost diagnoses, and comparisons to diagnoses from earlier time periods. From A Comparative Analysis of Methods of Health Risk Assessment, M-HB96-1.

Description: Any analysis of risk assessment and risk adjustment must pay special attention to large claims. If the goal of risk adjustment is to motivate carriers to be efficient,, as opposed to motivating carriers to select the best risks,then finding a solution to the problem of compensating carriers fairly for these high-cost claimants is an absolute necessity. From A Comparative Analysis of Methods of Health Risk Assessment, M-HB96-1.ese

Description: At this luncheon session, the winning papers from the 1990 Society of Actuaries Health Section's research paper competition are presented. The two winning papers are: 1. 'The Natural Limitations of Health Care Trend: A Paper Concerned with Methodologies of Determining Trend Assumptions for Retiree Health Costs' by Jeffrey P. Petertil, and 2. 'Modeling Flexible Benefit Selection' by Charles S. Fuhrer and Arnold F. Shapiro. From the Record of the Society of Actuaries Vol. 17, No. 3B.

Description: For the top-20 key risks, the carriers were asked to identify the key risk indicators (KRIs) they use for monitoring and the activities they use, or plan to use, to mitigate the likelihood of occurrence and/or the severity of impact.